Pages

A blog to give a voice to our concern about the continued erosion of our democratic processes not only within the House of Commons and within our electoral system but also throughout our society. Here you will find articles about the current problems within our parliamentary democracy, about actions both good and bad by our elected representatives, about possible solutions, opinions and debate about the state of democracy in Canada, and about our roles/responsibilities as democratic citizens. We invite your thoughtful and polite comments upon our posts and ask those who wish to post longer articles or share ideas on this subject to submit them for inclusion as a guest post.Contact us at democracyunderfire@gmail.com

Sunday, August 2, 2015

With much speculation (Harper, will meet with Governor General David Johnston, Queen
Elizabeth II’s representative in Canada, Sunday at 9:55 a.m., according
to a statement released late Saturday by the prime minister’s office.) that today is the day that Harper will go to
the GG and dissolve parliament thus resulting in a record 11 week
election period (or
not) here is a quick review of the inordinate amount of money
that will be spent during that time. No attempt has been made to
estimate the millions spent by the Harper regime in recent months
assassinating one particular opposition leader or how much of our
money was spent promoting their various taxable bribes for families
with children and other self promotion on our dime.

With longer campaign possible taxpayers could be on the hook for
more than ususal since they subsidize the donations that fuel
campaigns and then subsidize parties and their candidates again for
spending that money during a campaign.

“Most of the money parties and candidates will be throwing
around during the campaign comes from donations, which are worth a
generous tax credit of 75 per cent on the first $400, 50 per cent on
the next $350 and 33.3 per cent on the next $500.The
Canadian Taxpayers Federation estimates those
tax credits are worth somewhere between $16 million and $36 million
per year in foregone revenue.Each party running a full slate of candidates is entitled to
spend a maximum of about $25 million for a five-week campaign; each
candidate an average of about $100,000.But, under the recently passed Fair Elections Act, those
spending limits will increase by 1/37 for each day a campaign exceeds
37 days. That’s an extra $675,000 per day for each party’s
national campaign, an additional $2,700 per day for their candidates.A campaign that is double the minimum length would effectively
double the spending limits and, theoretically, double the amount of
money parties and candidates stand to be reimbursed, at up
to 50 per cent for parties and up to 60 per cent for candidates, —
by taxpayers — when it’s all over.
The rebates handed out to parties and candidates after the
five-week election campaign in 2011 were estimated by Elections
Canada to be over $60 million, presuming most of their funding came
from individual donations a further $60 million or so in tax
deductions would also be available to those individuals. With an
extended election period the various rebates, tax deductions and
extra administrative costs of longer office leases for returning
offices, staff and equipment, estimated at $375 million for a 37day
campaign, could easily approach $100 million.
A third party can spend a total of $205,800 across Canada during a
37-day campaign, and no more than $4,116 in any riding, this total
however would increase by a little over $5500 per day for a longer
election period. A number
of rules as to what and who falls into this
category exist.

Many, if not most, of these cheques will go towards community
projects that desperately need some federal funding, some of which
have been waiting for years for funding, its not the expenditure
thats the problem its the timing! This ploy to buy votes is so
obvious and blatant that no one should fall for it, but many will
actually believe that line “well now we have balanced the budget we
can afford it” line, this despite the PBO assertion that that we
are in fact in the hole still and that the economy is tanking!

As I have said here before I am coming to the conclusion that the
limits on party and candidate spending, contributors tax deductions,
and party and candidate reimbursement, should all be further
restricted not increased as was brought in by that “Fair”
Elections Act. If we are to have “Fair” elections the impact that
“big money” has upon what the electorate hears about a particular
party or candidate must be restricted and the ability of parties or
candidates with less access to large war chests, such as those with
support in less affluent riding’s, to put their platform before the
public must be enhanced.

There are ways that they can put their ideas and platforms before
the general public across the country without any cost to the public
purse or their own coffers – one such is called 'debates' and
although many will have limited circulation there WAS one that was
available across the country. Now it seems that Mulclair
has joined Harper in laying down 'conditions' tor
any debates that he participates in that will kill the TV
Consortium’s proposed October debate and further sideline the only
Leader whom they all seem scared to debate. How can any leader who
supports democracy (we know Harper does not, but Mulclair purports
to) agree to debates that do not include ALL party leaders who have a
seat in The House and support in every province.

Unfortunately little can be done to restrict advertising by
individuals, groups or parties outside the election period, in a
democracy folks are free to express their opinion and spend their
money how they wish, but I sure want MUCH stronger, enforceable,
rules upon government self promotion advertising and an independent
body to vet such advertising BEFORE it hits the airwaves. Well I guy
can dream cant he?

Sadly there is a real danger that the guys who spend the most
money on attack Ads, self promotion and spreading lies and innuendo
will be the ones to buy the most votes, would but that were not true
but far too many folks are easily fooled.

Sunday, July 26, 2015

In reviewing the events for this
period I was struck by how important is is to look back at the
undemocratic and secretive actions of the Harper regime, even I, who
has written frequently and consistently on this subject had forgotten
so many of the things done to diminish our governance. This just 2
or 3 years ago, and remember what they do is a much better measure of
their ideology than what they say!.

The amount of effort being put
into suppressing information and controlling the message continued to
increase substantially as the Harper regime consolidated their
centralization of power within the PMO to the point where even some
of their own MPs complained about not being permitted to speak in the
House! The independent PBO position was eventually rolled into the
mandate of the Parliamentary Library, the Inspector Generals
position was eliminated, the environmental commissioner
resigned early in frustration, and the RCMP were told they could not
speak to our MPs without permission!

Here then are a FEW of the hits democracy took in 2012 / 13 under
the Harper Regime........

2012
Rights and Democracy, chartered by Parliament in 1988 to promote
human rights and democratic development worldwide, was
eliminated in 2012 In a statement in April,
Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird indicated the ailing group was
among the casualties of government efforts to “find efficiencies
and savings.” Legislation, he said, would be introduced in the
“near future” to disband the organization and its functions would
be absorbed by his department.

By October the Harper regime had signed the 'trade
agreement' with China without ANY consultation with, or indeed
information being revealed to, either parliament or the Canadian
Citizens. “...
it
will operate the same way Chapter 11 of NAFTA works
(which will) allow corporations to claim damages against Canada if
any level of Canadian government (municipal, provincial or federal)
causes them to experience less profit than had been anticipated.“
While Finance officials refused to disclose the budget for the
current “action plan” a Treasury Board document shows that
cabinet approved
$16 million in “economic action plan” advertising in the first
quarter of this year alone. A further $18
million was approved for other misleading advertising as well as $4.5
million for War of 1812 advertising. In all, the federal cabinet had
already approved more than $64 million in ad spending for 2012-13

As part of the Harper Regimes series of initiatives to cut support
to charities and voluntary organizations programs were eliminated,
funding was reduced or delayed and third-party research support was
eradicated. The 2012 budget gave the Canada Revenue Agency $8
million, later topped
up to $13.4 million, to conduct
60 political activity audits of charities, these
audits appeared to target those charities
that who may have been critical of the regimes
policies.December 2012: After Auditor General Michael
Ferguson found “inadequate
documentation” of senators expense claims
questions are raised about Conservative Sen. Mike Duffy declared
primary residence in P.E.I., since he is claiming living expenses for
staying in his longtime Ottawa-area home and Nigel Wright, the prime
minister's chief of staff, apparently saying it appeared that Duffy's
residence expenses complied with the rules. Three years later this
issue is before
the courts with Duffy and several other
Senators suspended.Jan 2013
The Department of Justice was laid bare in open court when senior
lawyer Edgar Schmidt said he and his colleagues have
been receiving “illegal” instructions
regarding conflict of legislation with the Charter, with government
lawyers being told to not raise concerns with the minister .… even
if the probability of inconsistency is 95 per cent or more..........

The Liberals elected Justin Trudeau as their leader in late
January and the Conservatives promptly launched a series of personal
attack TV ads which then continued almost unabated over the ensuing 2
years till the election. Millions have been spent assassinating the
leader whilst saying little about policy.

February
The federal government officially
closed a Vancouver coast guard base that's
considered to be the busiest in Canada along with the shuttering of
three other B.C. coast guard communication centres as part of the
government’s deep budget cuts , the Kitsilano Canadian Coast Guard
Station no longer offers search-and-rescue services. Meanwhile
opening The Office of Religious Freedom seemed to be much more
important!

......................

March
Having failed to seek a replacement for Kevin Page, the
Parliamentary Budget Officer, whose contract the did not renew they
then defeated an NDP to extend his mandateuntil a competent
replacement is found. He was
eventualy replaced
as the by the Parliamentary Librarian
'temporarily' whilst a 'process' takes place to perhaps replace him.
However in a continueing effort to control any real information
getting out we
learn that Librarian staff have been silenced.
“Federal librarians and archivists who set
foot in classrooms, attend conferences or speak up at public meetings
on their own time are engaging in “high risk” activities,
according to the new code of conduct at Library and Archives Canada.
Given the dangers, the code says the department’s staff must
clear such “personal” activities with their managers in advance
to ensure there are no conflicts or “other risks to LAC.”

The
environmental
commissioner resigned
two years before the end of his mandate and just before leaving
points out some major 'gaps' in in the environmental policies of the
Conservative government.

“ I took the job when it
was agreed that a few amazing and fearless public servants would join
— namely, Mostafa Askari and Sahir Khan. We signed in proverbial
blood. We vowed to give Canada a true legislative budget office.
Nothing less. I chose career suicide. It was a very small price to
pay. After all, I had lost a son; I was “out of range.”

“Our institutions of accountability are in trouble.
Parliament does not get the information and analysis it needs to hold
the executive (the prime minister and cabinet) to account.”
“What’s
in it for the government to have a strong legislative budget office?
Not much. What’s in it for Parliament and Canadians to have a
strong budget office? Maybe a great deal. If it matters to you,
please tell your elected representatives.”

Members of the public wishing
to comment to the NEB
about the proposed East-West Pipeline are told they must first apply
for permission to participate. Under
the new rules, included in last springs omnibus budget any resident
who wants to send in a letter about their concerns must first apply
to the NEB for permission and fill out a 10-page form which asks for
a resume and references.
Finally in this litany of information suppression we have
the emails
sent out to RCMP officials, telling them they
need to get approval from the commissioner or the public safety
minister’s office before talking to politicians. In response to a
question in the House Candice Bergen (MP, Portage-Lisgar) said:-.
“If parliamentarians need to or want to meet with RCMP or
other officials, the appropriate place for them to do that is in
Parliamentary committees. If that member has a concern about any RCMP
member, they can speak with myself or the minister of public safety,”

Next up:- More
spent of “Action Plan” advertising, Parliament Prorogued again
and another Omnibus Budget.

Please Note
Parts 1 to 5 are now available as one long document (19 pages -
7900 words) in chronological order and
may be viewed, shared and downloaded on Google Docs.
Due to the large number of embedded links I recommend you import it
as a Docx, ODF Doc or HTML so that you may follow the references if
you wish for more information on a particular issue.

“The maximum amount that is allowed for election
expenses of a registered party for an
election is the product of $0.735 multiplied by the number of names
on the preliminary lists of electors for electoral districts in
which the registered party has endorsed a candidate”
“However “If an election period is longer than 37 days,
then the maximum amount......is increased by adding to it the product
of one thirty-seventh of the maximum amount...(from above).... and
the number of days in the election period minus 37.” (In other
words increased in direct proportion to the number of days in the
election period)

Whilst the electioneering and
advertising has already started and has been for some time once the
writ is dropped several things change. Firstly registered political
parties are subject to the above spending rules however they will
also get reimbursed from the public purse for 50% of said expenses
subject to certain restrictions.

“The Chief Electoral Officer shall provide the Receiver
General with a certificate that sets out the amount that is 50%
of the registered party’s election expenses that were
paid by its registered agents as set out in the return for its
general election expenses if........ candidates
endorsed by the registered party received at least 2% of the number
of valid votes cast at the election, or 5% of
the number of valid votes cast in the electoral districts in which
the registered party endorsed a candidate.”
“On receipt of the certificate, the Receiver General shall
reimburse the amount set out in it to the registered party by paying
that amount out of the Consolidated Revenue Fund.”Secondly the
expenditures by third partys upon advertising for or against any
particular Party or Candidate is severely restricted.

“A third party shall not incur election advertising expenses
of a total amount of more than $150,000 in relation to a general
election.”
“Not more than $3,000 of the total amount referred to in
subsection (1) shall be incurred to promote or oppose the election of
one or more candidates in a given electoral district,......( This
)“only applies to an amount incurred with respect to a leader of
a registered party or eligible party to the extent that it is
incurred to promote or oppose his or her election in a given
electoral district.”

There is however no restriction upon the Government running
“infomercials” promoting existing programs however “partisan”
advertising on the public dime is not permitted at any time, and we
know how much notice the Harper Regime has taken of that rule don’t
we! There is however a restriction as to who can contribute to a
campaign.
“No person or entity other than an individualwho is a Canadian citizen or is a permanent resident......
shall make a contribution to a registered party, a registered
association, a nomination contestant, a candidate or a leadership
contestant.
Not that such rules have stopped corporations
or conservative candidates from ignoring such
impediments in previous elections!

Given that the Conservatives reportedly have considerably more in
their war chest than any other party there is clearly an advantage
for them to extend the “election period” to increase their
ability to spend more than the opposition on advertising (and get 50%
of it back) and to limit advertising by groups that oppose this
dictatorial and antidemocratic regime. I believe that the writ WILL
be dropped early and that the Harper Regeme will spend every penny
that they can get away with, of both their funds and ours, to
demonize the opposition and spread their spin in an effort to retain
power.

Personally I find the advertising limits far to high across the
board particularly when much of the expenditure is spent simply
slamming the other guy rather than presenting their “platform”
and intentions if elected. This, and the elimination of the per vote
subsidy clearly tilts the playing field towards established partys
and more particularly the party currently in power. With Harpers
ministers busy out buying the vote with announcements of
infrastructure funding from funds that miraculously have suddenly
become available just before the election, bribing families with
backdated child benefits and spending millions of our money on self
promotion and millions from their war chest on assassinating
opposition leaders it is far from a equal opportunity election.

If you doubt that money talks simply count the number of anti
Trudeau ads during your evening TV viewing and figure out the cost of
each of those ads..... if you can stomach seeing that much BS in one
viewing!